Subjects: ACCC court action against Qantas; Labor’s sweetheart airline deal that will keep airfare prices higher; Labor’s proposed PRRT tax changes; Labor’s disastrous industrial relations law changes; the Prime Minister’s divisive Voice, Treaty, Truth proposal; the Prime Minister’s Canberra Voice devoid of detail.
E&OE
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Joining me now is the Opposition Leader Peter Dutton live from Brisbane. Mr Dutton, thanks so much for your time.
PETER DUTTON:
Pleasure Andrew. Thank you.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Can I start by asking your view of the behaviour of Qantas that’s emerged in recent days?
PETER DUTTON:
Well Andrew, I think there’s a level of arrogance, and I think, frankly, like all Australians, I’m disappointed in the way in which it’s alleged that Qantas has been treating some of its customers. There have been a lot of customers, who I think have made legitimate complaints, over the course of the last 18 months or so about their interactions with Qantas, their inability to get refunds for tickets purchased. The ACCC obviously has launched an investigation.
I think Alan Joyce has been a very effective CEO of Qantas. He’s formed very close personal relationship with Anthony Albanese and obviously this is a relationship that works two ways. So, I think a lot of Australians want the best for Qantas because it’s an iconic brand, but when you see the outcome, the decision of the government to stop Qatar coming in to compete against Qantas – a decision made by the Prime Minister – it means that people; travellers, Australians, who want to go and see family or go for a holiday overseas are literally paying thousands of dollars more for their airline ticket and I think that’s unconscionable.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
What do you think of Alan Joyce’s $10 million bonus and the intransigence initially of Qantas over the flight credits?
PETER DUTTON:
Look, I think that’s an issue for the board of Qantas in relation to Mr Joyce’s remuneration arrangements. Unlike the Prime Minister, I don’t support the renationalisation of the Commonwealth Bank. When governments start to get into the business of saying what wages should be or bonuses should be, then I think that’s quite a departure from what has served us well as a country. The free market should be allowed to operate, but there should be consequences and the board should take that into consideration when they’re making a decision to grant the bonus or to withhold one. We’ve seen that in relation to other companies, particularly where the ACCC has drawn an adverse conclusion in relation to the conduct of the board or the CEO or the company in general.
So, these are very serious allegations that are being made by the ACCC and the whole issue around ghost seats that the ACCC is looking at at the moment, that is a very, very serious allegation. I think Qantas has tarnished its brand. I think a lot of Australians, frankly, just want to jump on the airline – whether it’s Qantas or Virgin – get to their destination, get to work, or get to see family and friends without being hectored to and without the CEOs of many of these companies, including Qantas lecturing Australians on what they should think or how they should act or indeed how they should vote.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Not happy then that they’re involved in the Voice campaign. Do you put that down to Alan Joyce’s relationship with Anthony Albanese as well?
PETER DUTTON:
Oh, there’s no question about that, and lots of people are asking legitimate questions about that arrangement, about that relationship. Anthony Albanese has been happy to walk up every red carpet with Alan Joyce, and that’s been well documented. But when you’ve got Qantas offering free flights to one side of the debate at the moment, when you’ve got Qantas – and look to be fair, many other CEOs of listed companies who feel that they need to be popular as well by taking a position on these social issues, they do that and there’s a conclusion that the public will draw.
People will be happy with their conduct, unhappy with their conduct. I actually think the business of Qantas is to reduce airfare prices wherever possible, to take care of their employees, to make sure that they’ve got a maximum return for their shareholders in the circumstances. I think given that literally billions of dollars have been provided to airlines, including Qantas over the course of COVID, people expect a lot in return. I think it’s right for the Australian public to expect Qantas to conduct itself in a professional way and in a respectful way in relation to their customers.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Just briefly on that, should Qantas pay back the JobKeeper money it received?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, the condition that it received the money under meant that they didn’t have to pay it back – and I know the Prime Minister’s running out with this line at the moment – but frankly, that’s just a tacky distraction from the fact that the Prime Minister has made a decision to stop Qatar from competing against Qantas…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright, just on that…
PETER DUTTON:
…the government’s had seven different positions in seven days.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Just on that, Mr Dutton. Obviously, you think the government should review that decision on letting more Qatar Airways flights in? Should they be allowed in and will you be pursuing the government in Question Time on this issue this week?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, yes, to all of the above Andrew.
I do think there is a level of murkiness around this decision. The government’s, as I say, given seven different reasons in seven different days. Ministers don’t have their story right. We don’t know Catherine King’s involvement, we don’t know the Prime Minister’s discussions with other Ministers, with the CEO of Qantas, etc. and none of that has been divulged, and it should be because there is a tangible impact on Australians.
At a time when Australians are paying more for their airfares – and many Australians have noted this over the last 12 months or so – the government’s made a decision to reduce competition. It’s also the inbound benefit as well as; inbound tourism. At a time when the economy is starting to contract, those tourists spending money here in regional towns and capital cities with small businesses and cafes and caravan parks and the rest of that, that is a great thing, and why the Prime Minister would want to stymie that, I think is beyond the comprehension of most Australians.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright, well let me ask now about some key legislation coming up this week, legislation the Greens at least initially, are suggesting they’ll oppose. Will the Opposition oppose the PRRT tax changes?
PETER DUTTON:
Well look, we’ve tried to be constructive in relation to this issue. We want to see the sovereign risk issues addressed that the government’s created. For the first time in many decades – probably since Labor was in government in the 70s – they’ve created a sovereign risk consideration for countries like Japan and South Korea. They’re worried about, and they’re actively making decisions not to invest into Australia.
Now, that will have a huge consequence on the budget, on the economy more broadly. We’ve said that there should be condensed timelines in relation to the consideration of some of the new approvals, because again, there are huge jobs being created out of these projects, and huge economic benefit back to the State Governments as well as the Commonwealth Government.
So, we’ll continue those discussions, but they haven’t acted in good faith, they’ve foisted this upon us very quickly. But we’ll make our position known and we’ll continue discussions if the government’s willing to act in good faith.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Sounds like you’re going to oppose it because the government’s not coming to the party?
PETER DUTTON:
No, I wouldn’t draw that conclusion at all. We’ve tried to be genuine. Look, in relation to, you know, dozens and dozens – 80 Bills I think, where we’ve supported the government – we can find common ground quite often – it doesn’t get into the media – but we can have a discussion with the government.
But in relation to this issue, you’ve got Chris Bowen involved, who is one of the most erratic Ministers in the government, so it’s difficult to try and have a sensible discussion, but we’ll try and have that discussion.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
What do you make of the fact you and the Greens are likely to work together to block the government’s superannuation tax changes?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, you don’t want to make a habit of forming an alliance with the Greens, but for various reasons, your interests might align.
Look, I think it’s clear that one of the key elements of the government’s behaviour – which is now on display to all Australians, we saw it at the ALP Conference only a fortnight ago – is that every decision is in the shadow of what’s in the union leaders best interests. Their decision around superannuation; to stop people accessing it for housing, for example, is not about the consumer, it’s not about the superannuation holder – it’s their money don’t forget – it’s about what benefit they can confer on the Industry Superfunds run by the Unions. It’s a decision in relation to the gig economy, which is actually not about the workers as you pointed out in your intro. People who are friendly with the government seem to have been carved out of this.
But you’ve got a situation where the decisions made around how can we increase union coverage, because if you increase union membership above the seven or eight per cent it is now, you get more money coming into the Labor Party, more delegates at conferences and right down to the decision around not considering Small Modular Reactors – zero emissions, latest technology – not because it’s not in the national interest and that we need it to firm up renewables, but because the Labor Party won’t support it internally, and that’s you know, again, I think on full display for all Australians.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright, let me ask you about the industrial relations reforms. I imagine you’ll be opposed to most of it, right? You’ve got ‘Same Job, Same Pay’ – if you can one by one, go through them, perhaps? Same Job, Same Pay, the wage theft stuff – which suggests unions can come in and look at employee records, the gig economy stuff – which as I pointed out, doesn’t relate to Airtasker apparently, who donated to the Labor Party, but it does relate to Mable who the unions don’t like, and finally, casuals.
PETER DUTTON:
Well again Andrew, I mean, this takes us back to a point pre-Paul Keating’s time as Prime Minister, and he’s pointed that out; the attacks on business, at exactly the wrong time, will mean that people’s cost of living goes up.
I think the government’s concentrating on every other issue at the moment. The Prime Minister’s obsessed with the Voice and has lost sight of the fact that every economic decision the government’s made so far in government, out of two budgets, has resulted in people’s cost of living going through the roof, and people see it every day at the bowser, at the supermarket, when they pay their insurance bill, whatever it might be.
So, I think look at it in that context; why is the government motivated to do this when every business group, every organisation is against it? It’s because it’s on the union wish list.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Okay. Are there any of these IR changes you are minded to support? Any of the four categories?
PETER DUTTON:
The criteria for us will be does it reduce flexibility for the worker and for the employer? Does it drive up the cost of living for families and for small businesses? Does it make it harder for a small business to keep its doors open at a time when the government is making it harder for that business to be successful? They will be the essential criteria that we apply, and on what we’ve seen so far, will be very, very difficult for us to support what will be an economy destroying piece of legislation and just another nail in the coffin of small business.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright. Let me ask now about the Voice campaign. What do you make of John Farnham getting involved?
PETER DUTTON:
Well Andrew, I think first point is that, you know, I’m an 80s child – grew up in the 80s – every Australian is happy with the news that John is making a recovery from a pretty serious condition, obviously, and we wish him and his family every best wish and hope for a very bright future for him.
I think the problem at the moment is not that, you know, entertainers and people from the top end of town are supporting the Voice, or lending their support to it, it’s that the Prime Minister won’t support the public in their decision making. He’s deliberately withholding information and withholding that information until after the election. He’s been very clear about that. He’ll give you the detail after the vote has taken place, which is quite remarkable.
So, I think in a sense it’s the appropriate theme song for the Yes Campaign, because remember the key line in the lyrics there is; ‘you’re the voice, try and understand it’, and I don’t want to sing it, I don’t want to break into verse with you here Andrew, but I honestly don’t think most Australians understand it and they want to be informed.
There are good people on the yes and no case or who have decided to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’, but there are many people in the middle who just say; ‘well, I’ve got a big hesitation here, it’s going in the Constitution, it’s going to be permanent, I think it’s divisive’. There are many reasons that people have a hesitation. The Prime Minister is making a deliberate decision not to help people understand what the Voice is about.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright, well numbers suggest, the No Campaign will win, and those numbers have declined for the Yes Campaign since you made the decision to oppose enshrining a Voice in the Constitution. Do you accept if it goes down, your opposition to it will be a major factor, if not the deciding factor in that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well Andrew, a couple of points. I mean, one is that on the latest Newspoll, 29 per cent of Labor voters are voting ‘no’. So one in three Labor supporters will vote ‘no’ at the upcoming Referendum. Now that’s not something that’s motivated by my position, I suspect. It’s because of the reasons that I outlined before. The PM is just being tricky and sneaky and not providing the information.
Second point is that I wrote to the Prime Minister in January of this year with 15 reasonable questions on behalf of millions of Australians who just wanted to know the detail. The Prime Minister has still not answered that letter, he’s still not provided the detail, he’s not answered the questions and given the information to the Australian people.
I went through many Indigenous communities right across the country speaking to elders, speaking to women, to grandmothers in those communities about what the Voice would mean for them, whether they supported it, whether it was going to provide the practical outcomes to them on the ground. I considered it for a long period of time. I took legal advice and my considered view was that this was not in our country’s best interests and that it was not going to provide the practical outcomes for Indigenous Australians in regional and remote areas that we all want – and that’s the problem.
This is a $450 million exercise the Prime Minister’s embarking on here. He’s dividing the nation and I think that money could be much better spent in building boarding houses in Indigenous schools in Alice Springs, and providing safety for those kids today; but that’s not what the Prime Minister’s doing here. He’s after some sort of legacy for his time in office, and it’s not going to benefit the Australian public.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright, we’re nearly out of time. I have a couple of things I want to ask you about before we go. So this is former New South Wales Liberal Premier Mike Baird on the Voice last week:
[excerpt]
MIKE BAIRD:
My hope would be that there’s one last chance for the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition to actually come together. Like there’s a lot of similarities, there are things they agree with. It might take some compromise on both sides, but I think for the good of the country, for the good of Indigenous communities across Australia, I think it would be a great thing if there was one last chance to try and find that unified position.
[end excerpt]
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Do you reckon you and Anthony Albanese could come to a unified position now? I mean, you do support regional voices, for example.
PETER DUTTON:
I hope that we can come to a position of consensus because I think it would be in the national interest to do so, and my offer to the Prime Minister has been that we fully support recognition of Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. That would be a huge step and it would be a unifying moment like 1967 was for our country. That is open to the Prime Minister today. We’re sitting for the fortnight in Canberra. Parliament can pass legislation on a joint basis.
I’m happy to sit down in addition to that, with the Prime Minister to work up legislation that listens to the Calma-Langton Report, which provides for a regional body, a local body. Those women in Alice Springs, Laverton, Leonora, other places that we’ve been, for them to be heard, but not to have it enshrined in the Constitution because it’s permanent and it’s divisive there. That’s the position. I think it’s a fair compromise, but the Prime Minister…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
It’s a bit confusing, though, Mr Dutton. When you support a Voice.
PETER DUTTON:
I just don’t think it is Andrew.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
You support a Voice, don’t you? So the Voice isn’t a bad concept to you? Okay.
PETER DUTTON:
Listening to people is not a bad concept. I mean, that’s very clear, but as we saw in Western Australia, somebody who wanted to dig a post hole, or put a concrete slab in for a shed, wanted to move four kilos worth of dirt, had to get a report from an Aboriginal cultural expert – at the cost of hundreds or thousands of dollars. That was in legislation. Had it been in the Constitution, it wouldn’t have been abolished. It couldn’t have been abolished…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Alright.
PETER DUTTON:
…There is no law the Parliament can pass…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Okay, Mr Dutton.
PETER DUTTON:
To out rule the Constitution.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Mr Dutton, if the Voice fails, what’s your solution to closing the gap? What would you do in government?
PETER DUTTON:
Well Andrew, I would take up the advice of those women that we’ve spoken to. They’re not interested in a Voice, in another layer of bureaucracy of 24 elite people appointed working out of Canberra. I think they want a safe environment for their kids, they want an education for their children and their grandchildren, they want employment opportunities, they want housing.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
How would you do that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I would work very closely – predominantly with the Northern Territory Government, but also the Western Australia and the Queensland Government as well. The issue for us, the most acute issue is in the remote and regional areas – and frankly it’s not just Indigenous kids or Indigenous families in remote WA – it’s also non-Indigenous communities that are missing out on health services, the maternal health services, for example.
We’ve got a scheme on the table which is fully supported by teachers and principals to try and provide accommodation at the places of learning, at the schools, so that the kids can be fed there, they can be accommodated there overnight. That reduces the incidence of domestic violence, of sexual violence, restoring law and order is the first priority to it, providing that intervention at an early age for those kids. They’re the first steps that the government should be making now that would actually move the dial, but the Prime Minister has not taken that…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
…alright Mr Dutton, sorry, we’re nearly out of time, but I’ll just ask you very briefly. The PM says, if this fails, that’s it. Would you commit to a Referendum question on constitutional recognition of First Nations people alone in your first term of government, or at your second election, if elected? Would you have another Referendum for constitutional recognition in that term?
PETER DUTTON:
We went to the last election and a number of elections before that with that as our policy and that will be our policy going into the next election as well. I think it’s right and respectful to recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. We will work with the Labor Party to find a common ground, but the Prime Minister having this dummy spit, it reminds me of Kevin Rudd, that this is the greatest moral challenge of our time, but if you don’t get your own way then everyone else can bugger off, and I don’t think that’s in the best interest of Australians…
ANDREW CLENNELL:
So, you’d hold another Referendum?
PETER DUTTON:
Yes, I believe very strongly that it is the right thing to do, but enshrining a Voice in the Constitution is divisive, it will divide the country down the middle, it will not provide the practical outcomes, it will change the way of government very significantly because of the broad words the Prime Minister’s proposing to put into the Constitution – against legal advice I might say – and I think it would grind the process of government decision making to a near halt, and I think we would change our country quite dramatically, and that’s why people – including one in three Labor voters – don’t support the Voice.
ANDREW CLENNELL:
Mr Dutton, thanks so much for your time this morning. Happy Father’s Day.
PETER DUTTON:
Thank you Andrew, and to you. Thank you.
[ends]